Long-term Outcomes with Spinal versus General Anesthesia for Hip Fracture Surgery: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The effects of spinal versus general anesthesia on long-term outcomes have not been well studied. This study tested the hypothesis that spinal anesthesia is associated with better long-term survival and functional recovery than general anesthesia. METHODS: A prespecified analysis was conducted of long-term outcomes of a completed randomized superiority trial that compared spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for hip fracture repair. Participants included previously ambulatory patients 50 yr of age or older at 46 U.S. and Canadian hospitals. Patients were randomized 1:1 to spinal or general anesthesia, stratified by sex, fracture type, and study site. Outcome assessors and investigators involved in the data analysis were masked to the treatment arm. Outcomes included survival at up to 365 days after randomization (primary); recovery of ambulation among 365-day survivors; and composite endpoints for death or new inability to ambulate and death or new nursing home residence at 365 days. Patients were included in the analysis as randomized. RESULTS: A total of 1,600 patients were enrolled between February 12, 2016, and February 18, 2021; 795 were assigned to spinal anesthesia, and 805 were assigned to general anesthesia. Among 1,599 patients who underwent surgery, vital status information at or beyond the final study interview (conducted at approximately 365 days after randomization) was available for 1,427 (89.2%). Survival did not differ by treatment arm; at 365 days after randomization, there were 98 deaths in patients assigned to spinal anesthesia versus 92 deaths in patients assigned to general anesthesia (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.44, P = 0.59). Recovery of ambulation among patients who survived a year did not differ by type of anesthesia (adjusted odds ratio for spinal vs. general, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.14; P = 0.31). Other outcomes did not differ by treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes were similar with spinal versus general anesthesia.

Outcomes with spinal versus general anesthesia for patients with and without preoperative cognitive impairment: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of spinal versus general anesthesia on the risk of postoperative delirium or other outcomes for patients with or without cognitive impairment (including dementia) is unknown. METHODS: Post hoc secondary analysis of a multicenter pragmatic trial comparing spinal versus general anesthesia for adults aged 50 years or older undergoing hip fracture surgery. RESULTS: Among patients randomized to spinal versus general anesthesia, new or worsened delirium occurred in 100/295 (33.9%) versus 107/283 (37.8%; odds ratio [OR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60 to 1.19) among persons with cognitive impairment and 70/432 (16.2%) versus 71/445 (16.0%) among persons without cognitive impairment (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.47, p = 0.46 for interaction). Delirium severity, in-hospital complications, and 60-day functional recovery did not differ by anesthesia type in patients with or without cognitive impairment. DISCUSSION: Anesthesia type is not associated with differences in delirium and functional outcomes among persons with or without cognitive impairment.

Pain, Analgesic Use, and Patient Satisfaction With Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Hip Fracture Surgery : A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The REGAIN (Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture) trial found similar ambulation and survival at 60 days with spinal versus general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery. Trial outcomes evaluating pain, prescription analgesic use, and patient satisfaction have not yet been reported. OBJECTIVE: To compare pain, analgesic use, and satisfaction after hip fracture surgery with spinal versus general anesthesia. DESIGN: Preplanned secondary analysis of a pragmatic randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02507505). SETTING: 46 U.S. and Canadian hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 50 years or older undergoing hip fracture surgery. INTERVENTION: Spinal or general anesthesia. MEASUREMENTS: Pain on postoperative days 1 through 3; 60-, 180-, and 365-day pain and prescription analgesic use; and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: A total of 1600 patients were enrolled. The average age was 78 years, and 77% were women. A total of 73.5% (1050 of 1428) of patients reported severe pain during the first 24 hours after surgery. Worst pain over the first 24 hours after surgery was greater with spinal anesthesia (rated from 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]; mean difference, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.68]). Pain did not differ across groups at other time points. Prescription analgesic use at 60 days occurred in 25% (141 of 563) and 18.8% (108 of 574) of patients assigned to spinal and general anesthesia, respectively (relative risk, 1.33 [CI, 1.06 to 1.65]). Satisfaction was similar across groups. LIMITATION: Missing outcome data and multiple outcomes assessed. CONCLUSION: Severe pain is common after hip fracture. Spinal anesthesia was associated with more pain in the first 24 hours after surgery and more prescription analgesic use at 60 days compared with general anesthesia. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Patient-Reported Opioid Consumption and Pain Intensity After Common Orthopedic and Urologic Surgical Procedures With Use of an Automated Text Messaging System.

Importance: Surgeons must balance management of acute postoperative pain with opioid stewardship. Patient-centered methods that immediately evaluate pain and opioid consumption can be used to guide prescribing and shared decision-making. Objective: To assess the difference between the number of opioid tablets prescribed and the self-reported number of tablets taken as well as self-reported pain intensity and ability to manage pain after orthopedic and urologic procedures with use of an automated text messaging system. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted at a large, urban academic health care system in Pennsylvania. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who underwent orthopedic and urologic procedures and received postoperative prescriptions for opioids were included. Data were collected prospectively using automated text messaging until postoperative day 28, from May 1 to December 31, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the difference between the number of opioid tablets prescribed and the patient-reported number of tablets taken (in oxycodone 5-mg tablet equivalents). Secondary outcomes were self-reported pain intensity (on a scale of 0-10, with 10 being the highest level of pain) and ability to manage pain (on a scale of 0-10, with 10 representing very able to control pain) after orthopedic and urologic procedures. Results: Of the 919 study participants, 742 (80.7%) underwent orthopedic procedures and 177 (19.2%) underwent urologic procedures. Among those who underwent orthopedic procedures, 384 (51.8%) were women, 491 (66.7%) were White, and the median age was 48 years (interquartile range [IQR], 32-61 years); 514 (69.8%) had an outpatient procedure. Among those who underwent urologic procedures, 145 (84.8%) were men, 138 (80.7%) were White, and the median age was 56 years (IQR, 40-67 years); 106 (62%) had an outpatient procedure. The mean (SD) pain score on day 4 after orthopedic procedures was 4.72 (2.54), with a mean (SD) change by day 21 of -0.40 (1.91). The mean (SD) ability to manage pain score on day 4 was 7.32 (2.59), with a mean (SD) change of -0.80 (2.72) by day 21. The mean (SD) pain score on day 4 after urologic procedures was 3.48 (2.43), with a mean (SD) change by day 21 of -1.50 (2.12). The mean (SD) ability to manage pain score on day 4 was 7.34 (2.81), with a mean (SD) change of 0.80 (1.75) by day 14. The median quantity of opioids prescribed for patients who underwent orthopedic procedures was high compared with self-reported consumption (20 tablets [IQR, 15-30 tablets] vs 6 tablets used [IQR, 0-14 tablets]), similar to findings for patients who underwent urologic procedures (7 tablets [IQR, 5-10 tablets] vs 1 tablet used [IQR, 0-4 tablets]). Over the study period, 9452 of 15 581 total tablets prescribed (60.7%) were unused. A total of 589 patients (64.1%) used less than half of the amount prescribed, and 256 patients (27.8%) did not use any opioids (179 [24.1%] who underwent orthopedic procedures and 77 [43.5%] who underwent urologic procedures). Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study of adult patients reporting use of opioids after common orthopedic and urologic surgical procedures through a text messaging system, the quantities of opioids prescribed and the quantity consumed differed. Patient-reported data collected through text messaging may support clinicians in tailoring prescriptions and guide shared decision-making to limit excess quantities of prescribed opioids.

Comparison of Spatiotemporal Gait Parameters Following Operative Treatment of Trimalleolar Ankle Fractures vs Healthy Controls.

BACKGROUND: Controversy continues regarding appropriate indications for posterior malleolus fracture fixation in unstable rotational trimalleolar ankle injuries, with limited data comparing gait in operatively treated trimalleolar ankle fractures vs control populations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of trimalleolar ankle fracture fixation on gait parameters in the early postoperative period as compared to a healthy control population. METHODS: Adult patients having undergone operative treatment of isolated trimalleolar ankle fractures were eligible for inclusion. A total of 10 patients met the inclusion criteria and participated in the analysis. Patients were evaluated using standard parameters of human gait 6 months after their index procedures, with gait values compared to a population of 17 non-age-matched healthy control subjects in addition to literature values of healthy populations of younger and older subjects. RESULTS: Significant differences were noted between the spatiotemporal gait parameters of healthy control subjects and patients who had undergone operative treatment of trimalleolar ankle fractures. However, within the fracture group itself, no differences were found between patients with or without posterior malleolar fixation for any of the tested gait parameters. When patients were compared to literature values of younger and older healthy control populations, they were found to have gait patterns more similar to older rather than younger individuals. CONCLUSION: Operative fixation of trimalleolar ankle fracture does not restore normal gait function in the early postoperative period. Fixation of the posterior malleolus in particular also does not appear to improve gait characteristics. Patients who undergo surgery for these injuries demonstrate gait patterns similar to those of healthy older adults. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, Therapeutic (prospective cohort study).

Precision Medicine Applications to Manage Multiply Injured Patients With Orthopaedic Trauma.

Precision medicine offers potential for improved outcomes by tailoring interventions based on patient-specific demographics and disease-specific data. Precision methods are relatively unexplored in trauma patients. New research is being looked at for precision methods to treat patients with large extremity wounds, nonunions, and fractures associated with polytrauma. Precision-based clinical decision tools are being validated to optimize timing for open wound definitive closure. Early patient-specific biomarkers to stratify nonunion risk within 1 week of fracture are being explored. Patient-specific data to stage timing of major fracture interventions in multiply injured patients are being interrogated.

Transition to a semiclosed surgical intensive care unit (SICU) leads to improved resident job satisfaction: a prospective, longitudinal analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients, family members and ICU nurses have a higher level of satisfaction with the semiclosed ICU model. Whether or not resident physicians have this same reaction has not yet been investigated. We hypothesized that surgical residents would have improved job satisfaction with the transition from a mandatory consultation SICU to a semiclosed SICU model. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal survey. SETTING: Tertiary-care University Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Categorical general surgery residents. INTERVENTIONS: Change from mandatory consultation SICU to semiclosed SICU. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Categorical surgery residents at a tertiary-care university hospital were surveyed at 3 time points during and after the transition from a mandatory consultation SICU to a semiclosed SICU. The survey consisted of 12 questions designed to gauge the residents' overall job satisfaction as related to the SICU. All questions were on a 5-point Likert scale. Analysis of variance for trend and Fisher exact test were performed to compare the responses. 97 surveys were received. The response rates for the 3 periods were 66, 62 and 72%. Residents were less likely to feel "out of the loop" regarding the care of their ICU patients in the later periods (p = 0.046). There was significant improvement over time in scores for the statement "there is often confusion about placing orders for the care of my patients in the ICU" (p = 0.001). The critical care team's management of all orders in the SICU significantly improved resident job satisfaction over the 3-year period (p = 0.027). There were no significant differences between the responses of junior and senior residents. CONCLUSIONS: Resident satisfaction improved significantly over time with the transition from a mandatory consultation SICU to a semiclosed SICU.

Intensivist bedside ultrasound (INBU) for volume assessment in the intensive care unit: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Estimation of volume status in the high-acuity surgical population can be challenging. The use of intensivist bedside ultrasound (INBU) to rapidly assess volume status in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) was hypothesized to be feasible and as accurate as invasive measures. METHODS: Clinician sonographers (CSs) were trained to perform basic cardiac ultrasound and sonographic assessment of the inferior vena cava (IVC). A convenience sample of general surgery and trauma patients was enrolled in the SICU. The CS interpreted IVC and cardiac parameters and then categorized the subject as hypovolemic or not hypovolemic. Intensivists caring for the patients were blinded to the INBU findings and made a real-time expert clinical judgment (ECJ) of the patient's volume status (hypovolemic vs. not hypovolemic) using all available traditional data. RESULTS: A total of nine CSs performed 70 studies; three of the CSs performed the majority of the studies (86%). Adequate ultrasound (US) views for cardiac and IVC assessment were obtained in 96% and 89% of studies, respectively. The ECJ was considered to be the standard to which comparisons were made. The concordance rate between ECJ and central venous pressure was 62%. ECJ concordance with sonographic measures were similar (cardiac US = 75%, IVC US = 67%, and IVC collapse index = 65%). All pairwise comparisons against the ECJ/CVP agreement were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: INBU is feasible in the SICU and is equivalent to central venous pressure in assessing volume status. Noninvasive methods to assess volume status may decrease the need for invasive procedures.

TFAP2C controls hormone response in breast cancer cells through multiple pathways of estrogen signaling.

Breast cancers expressing estrogen receptor-alpha (ERalpha) are associated with a favorable biology and are more likely to respond to hormonal therapy. In addition to ERalpha, other pathways of estrogen response have been identified including ERbeta and GPR30, a membrane receptor for estrogen, and the key mechanisms regulating expression of ERs and hormone response remain controversial. Herein, we show that TFAP2C is the key regulator of hormone responsiveness in breast carcinoma cells through the control of multiple pathways of estrogen signaling. TFAP2C regulates the expression of ERalpha directly by binding to the ERalpha promoter and indirectly via regulation of FoxM1. In so doing, TFAP2C controls the expression of ERalpha target genes, including pS2, MYB, and RERG. Furthermore, TFAP2C controlled the expression of GPR30. In distinct contrast, TFAP2A, a related factor expressed in breast cancer, was not involved in estrogen-mediated pathways but regulated expression of genes controlling cell cycle arrest and apoptosis including p21(CIP1) and IGFBP-3. Knockdown of TFAP2C abrogated the mitogenic response to estrogen exposure and decreased hormone-responsive tumor growth of breast cancer xenografts. We conclude that TFAP2C is a central control gene of hormone response and is a novel therapeutic target in the design of new drug treatments for breast cancer.